Patna High CourtCR. MISC./32966/2020dismissed

Rakesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2021-01-06Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32966 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-270 Year-2019 Thana- JAGDISHPUR DistrictBhagalpur ====================================================== Rakesh Kumar Son of Bharat Lal Mandal Resident of Sonudih, Police Station - Goradih, District - Bhagalpur.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party:

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh No1. APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 06-01-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an undertaking to remove all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter as and when required. It is accordingly directed that all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter be removed within one month hereof.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 13.01.2020 in connection with Jagdishpur (Goradih) P.S. Case No. 270 of 2019 for the offences alleged under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in connection with the alleged murder of the informant's daughter, merely because he happens to be the husband of the deceased. In any event, he was admittedly

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32966 of 2020(2) dt.06-01-2021 2/2 residing at Gujarat at the time of occurrence. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Learned APP appears and opposes the bail petition, submitting that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased and there is specific allegation of demand of dowry and threatening by him.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations and gravity of the offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. The petition stands dismissed.

6. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided in para-1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar//- U T